which is faster? CIVIC fd 2.0 or LANCER EX GLX 2.0?

**niky** · November 28th, 2009 10:11 AM

Technically, a CVT should be quicker than a traditional AT, but it's more about the power-to-weight and power-to-drag of these two cars. Both the Lancer paddle-shift CVT and the Honda paddle-shift 5AT are very responsive (the Lancer a bit more so) and would do well on the racetrack.

**istan** · November 28th, 2009 10:11 AM

When you manually shift the Lancer cvt, it has short 1, 2, 3 gears. 4, mid, 5, 6, longish too.

So, just put it in Ds, mash it, it'll rev to 4 - 5k and stay there, until "5th" gear. Then it'll shift to 6th.

**basti08** · November 28th, 2009 10:52 AM

i think if you wanna go fast, it is very stupid to use the paddle shift on a CVT. It's contradicting. CVT is a gearless tranny. The usual 6 pre set speeds (or 7 pre set speed on GD City)are there for use in gear or speed holding sort of engine braking which is yes, ideal on track. But not there to go fast. As for CVT, leave it to drive and mash the pedal to the metal. Only way to go fast.

**istan** · November 28th, 2009 02:04 PM

I know I know, I'm just saying if you'd use the manual shift in the CVT tranny, experience would be the same w/ the civic.

**babkalakal** · November 29th, 2009 12:33 AM

bench racing.
on speedlab's dastek dynamometer a stock civic FD 2litre automatic registers at 126.5hp. it would be interesting to see the lancer gt-a and gt on the same dyno.

on a physics stand point given a long enough straight top speed is only minimally if not at all affected by weight. so with everything else being equal top speed will be a function of a cars power, coefficient of drag and total frontal area and in certain cases if a car produces enough power to pull redline in top gear, final drive and gear ratio will determine top speed. i don't think both the civic and lancer can redline in 5th and 6th gears respectively.

acceleration is a different matter however. Force= mass * acceleration therefore acceleration = force/mass. acceleration will be inversely proportional to mass. all else equal the lighter car will get up to speed quicker than the heavier one.

share ko nadin i used to own a civic fd 2.0 matic. no bodykit. 225/45-17 tyres. modified it put down 144.5 hp at the wheels. sa sctex was able to max out at 206kph time and time again smack right at 6k rpm. i'm pretty sure i wasn't on a downhill grade but i cannot ascertain also if i was on a flat road or a slight incline or if any head or tail wind was present. kinuwento ko kay sir ferman lao of speedlab sabi nya that probably is top speed already.

**niky** · November 29th, 2009 11:09 AM

It's an automatic, so it's probably speed-limited by the transmission.

At 144 whp on the Speedlab dyno, and given the incredibly slick aerodynamics of the Civic, you should be able to hit 220 or so, given the right conditions.

126 is damn healthy. That's up there with the Focus TDCi (yeah, yeah, it's rated at 135 bhp, but its a turbo and it has an overboost function that's theoretically good for another 20 hp). It's even more impressive, given your FD is an automatic.

I think the Lancer dynos around 125-130 whp at Speedlab... but in terms of top speed, it'll be hampered by the larger frontal area compared to the Civic, and the extra length will cause some extra drag.